Re: GP3 forcing an upgrade (again)

I'm planning to upgrade my system later this year to a Duron . A 650 mhz , with the right mobo , can be clocked as high as 950 according to www.tomshardware.com I've also got an Isa modem so I'll wait for either the Abit KT7 or the QDI Kinetiz boards to be released . Both of these boards can unlock the CPU multiplier . Tests so far confirm that the Duron is very fast for a "value" chip. Andrew <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8k9s1m$t3p$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (36 lines)

> Ok, its got to that time again, first a few years ago it was F1GP2 that > forced me to upgrade (brand new Evesham Vale pc). Then it was GPL (Home > built brand new pc) that forced an upgrade. > > Now, with GP3 looming onto the horizon, I'm once more looking at the > best hardware upgrade options. > > So, has anyone got any opinions on the best upgrade path? (Obviously, > the pc's *main* use will be on-line and offline gaming, mostly driving > sims, TOCA2, GPL, GP2, GP3, Rally Masters, etc) > > NB: most previews, etc that I've seen concerning GP3, they appeared to > use 600 based cpu's, so I figure anything around 700/800 should run GP3 > pretty good? > > I'm thinking of either a Celeron (500a or 533a which apparently can > easily be overclocked to 750/800!) or an Athlon (Duron, which can also > be overclocked?) on a suitable M/B with AGPx4 & UDMA66 & softbios > settings & pc133 & FSB@133 support preferred. (Oh yeah, must have at > least 1 ISA slot too, cos my 56k Pace modem is ISA!) > > I'm hoping to use my old ATX case, PSU, keyboard, mouse & FDD. > > I was also thinking of getting some PC133 memory (min 128, possibly > 256Mb) and either a GeForce 2 GTS or Voodoo5 5000 card? (which also can > be overclocked, hehe). > > Prolly also need a new hard disk (at least 15Gb and with UDMA66 > support). And I may go the whole hog and get a new DVD drive as well! > (Bloody hell, this is gonna cost me!!!) > > Advice, opinions, comments, welcomed...... > > 8-) > > *Peter* - http://www.cix.co.uk/~peterpc/home.html

Ok, its got to that time again, first a few years ago it was F1GP2 that forced me to upgrade (brand new Evesham Vale pc). Then it was GPL (Home built brand new pc) that forced an upgrade. Now, with GP3 looming onto the horizon, I'm once more looking at the best hardware upgrade options. So, has anyone got any opinions on the best upgrade path? (Obviously, the pc's *main* use will be on-line and offline gaming, mostly driving sims, TOCA2, GPL, GP2, GP3, Rally Masters, etc) NB: most previews, etc that I've seen concerning GP3, they appeared to use 600 based cpu's, so I figure anything around 700/800 should run GP3 pretty good? I'm thinking of either a Celeron (500a or 533a which apparently can easily be overclocked to 750/800!) or an Athlon (Duron, which can also be overclocked?) on a suitable M/B with AGPx4 & UDMA66 & softbios settings & pc133 & FSB@133 support preferred. (Oh yeah, must have at least 1 ISA slot too, cos my 56k Pace modem is ISA!) I'm hoping to use my old ATX case, PSU, keyboard, mouse & FDD. I was also thinking of getting some PC133 memory (min 128, possibly 256Mb) and either a GeForce 2 GTS or Voodoo5 5000 card? (which also can be overclocked, hehe). Prolly also need a new hard disk (at least 15Gb and with UDMA66 support). And I may go the whole hog and get a new DVD drive as well! (Bloody hell, this is gonna cost me!!!) Advice, opinions, comments, welcomed...... 8-) *Peter* - http://www.cix.co.uk/~peterpc/home.html

It seems from today's news that AMD have just moved the goalposts again . The original item on tomshardware had both 650mhz and 700mhz chips clock to 950mhz without difficulty . AMD originally issued some unlocked cpu's for evaluation according to www.aceshardware.com but have subsequently locked them . I can only hope that someone comes up with some kind of workaround . Even a Duron clocked by 10% via FSB is still going to be very potent for racing sims . Keeping my ear to the ground Andrew Mark Stahl <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8kbl2u$ihg$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> do you have a link for more info on mobos that can unlock the CPU > multiplier? this is the first i've heard of it.... thanks > > > "A Thomas" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8kas1c$82i$[email hidden]... > > I'm planning to upgrade my system later this year to a Duron . A 650 mhz

, > > with the right mobo , can be clocked as high as 950 according to > > www.tomshardware.com > > > > I've also got an Isa modem so I'll wait for either the Abit KT7 or theQDI

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > Kinetiz boards to be released . Both of these boards can unlock the CPU > > multiplier . Tests so far confirm that the Duron is very fast for a > "value" > > chip. > > > > Andrew > > <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:8k9s1m$t3p$[email hidden]... > > > Ok, its got to that time again, first a few years ago it was F1GP2

that > > > forced me to upgrade (brand new Evesham Vale pc). Then it was GPL(Home

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > > built brand new pc) that forced an upgrade. > > > > > > Now, with GP3 looming onto the horizon, I'm once more looking at the > > > best hardware upgrade options. > > > > > > So, has anyone got any opinions on the best upgrade path? (Obviously, > > > the pc's *main* use will be on-line and offline gaming, mostly driving > > > sims, TOCA2, GPL, GP2, GP3, Rally Masters, etc) > > > > > > NB: most previews, etc that I've seen concerning GP3, they appeared to > > > use 600 based cpu's, so I figure anything around 700/800 should run

GP3

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > > pretty good? > > > > > > I'm thinking of either a Celeron (500a or 533a which apparently can > > > easily be overclocked to 750/800!) or an Athlon (Duron, which can also > > > be overclocked?) on a suitable M/B with AGPx4 & UDMA66 & softbios > > > settings & pc133 & FSB@133 support preferred. (Oh yeah, must have at > > > least 1 ISA slot too, cos my 56k Pace modem is ISA!) > > > > > > I'm hoping to use my old ATX case, PSU, keyboard, mouse & FDD. > > > > > > I was also thinking of getting some PC133 memory (min 128, possibly > > > 256Mb) and either a GeForce 2 GTS or Voodoo5 5000 card? (which also

can

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > > be overclocked, hehe). > > > > > > Prolly also need a new hard disk (at least 15Gb and with UDMA66 > > > support). And I may go the whole hog and get a new DVD drive as well! > > > (Bloody hell, this is gonna cost me!!!) > > > > > > Advice, opinions, comments, welcomed...... > > > > > > 8-) > > > > > > *Peter* - http://www.cix.co.uk/~peterpc/home.html > > > > > >

In article <[email hidden]>, Larry <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (20 lines)

>Because I've been there, and moved beyond it. > >Once you upgrade you'll understand. > >-Larry > >Uncle Fester <[email hidden]> wrote: >>Larry wrote: >> >>> I wouldn't buy a Celeron. No way, no how. Hot for heavy 3D >>> Gaming. >> >> >>Really? Have I been missing something? I'll be moving up soon >to >>either a PIII700 or 750, depending where the prices go. But >I've used >>first a C300, and now a Celeron 466, and haven't had any >complaints with >>it. Just curious how you come about the conclusion you do.

So what was your suggestion again? Get the fastest chip out there? Can't afford it. If I can get something that I can overclock to just as fast as the fastest, and save some bucks in the process, wouldn't that make sense? Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL hcp. +70.45 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, SKurj <[email hidden]> writes: >And.... bang for the buck a celery couldn't be beat back then > >Martyn_D >SKurj Or now, from what others have said... Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL hcp. +70.45 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Larry) wrote: > Buy what you need now, and for the future. If it over-clocks, > that's a bonus. > > That's the _proper_ way to look at this. Depends what you want from your system, I want the fastest pc for the lowest price, not too much to ask is it? hehe. > Overclocking isn't guaranteed. It's not a 'right'. You > typically only hear about the success stories, with the failures > buried away. But, if overclocking is done properly and in moderation it can work fine. I've overclocked my last three pc's, the last pc, my current *main* pc was hand built by me, and is overclocked (CPU, M/B and graphics card) and has worked fine since day one with no probs. I got the performance of a faster pc for less money. Obviously if you are gonna overclock, a little research beforehand is well advised! > The Athlon Platform is cheaper than the Intel, but the Intel is > (RAMBUS/i820 fiasco aside) more reliable and requires less > fiddling. Hmmm, not so sure about that, based on what info? My old AMD K6 200 (clocked at 225 and faster than a 233) was, and still is, very reliable. And I hear (from several well known websites such as Anandtech and Toms Hardware) that the new AMD's are pretty good CPU's. > I wouldn't buy a Celeron. No way, no how. Hot for heavy 3D Well my current main pc (a Celery 300a clocked at 450) has been clocked since the day I bought it, about 18 months ago? and has never missed a beat, and saved me loadsa money on a faster CPU. And again, according to those in the know (the well known overclocking/pc hardware sites) all say the new Celery's are pretty good value for money. A celeron running at *800* should run most games/sims pretty good IMHO? You pays your money and takes your choice. You are obviously *not* into overclocking, fair enough, no-one is asking/forcing you to do it if you don't want to. Me personally? If I know some pc hardware can be made to run faster, thus giving me a faster pc and saving me money, I'm gonna try it and see. Thats my choice. 8-) *Peter* - http://www.cix.co.uk/~peterpc/home.html

do you have a link for more info on mobos that can unlock the CPU multiplier? this is the first i've heard of it.... thanks "A Thomas" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8kas1c$82i$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I'm planning to upgrade my system later this year to a Duron . A 650 mhz , > with the right mobo , can be clocked as high as 950 according to > www.tomshardware.com > > I've also got an Isa modem so I'll wait for either the Abit KT7 or the QDI > Kinetiz boards to be released . Both of these boards can unlock the CPU > multiplier . Tests so far confirm that the Duron is very fast for a

"value"

Quoted text (43 lines)

> chip. > > Andrew > <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8k9s1m$t3p$[email hidden]... > > Ok, its got to that time again, first a few years ago it was F1GP2 that > > forced me to upgrade (brand new Evesham Vale pc). Then it was GPL (Home > > built brand new pc) that forced an upgrade. > > > > Now, with GP3 looming onto the horizon, I'm once more looking at the > > best hardware upgrade options. > > > > So, has anyone got any opinions on the best upgrade path? (Obviously, > > the pc's *main* use will be on-line and offline gaming, mostly driving > > sims, TOCA2, GPL, GP2, GP3, Rally Masters, etc) > > > > NB: most previews, etc that I've seen concerning GP3, they appeared to > > use 600 based cpu's, so I figure anything around 700/800 should run GP3 > > pretty good? > > > > I'm thinking of either a Celeron (500a or 533a which apparently can > > easily be overclocked to 750/800!) or an Athlon (Duron, which can also > > be overclocked?) on a suitable M/B with AGPx4 & UDMA66 & softbios > > settings & pc133 & FSB@133 support preferred. (Oh yeah, must have at > > least 1 ISA slot too, cos my 56k Pace modem is ISA!) > > > > I'm hoping to use my old ATX case, PSU, keyboard, mouse & FDD. > > > > I was also thinking of getting some PC133 memory (min 128, possibly > > 256Mb) and either a GeForce 2 GTS or Voodoo5 5000 card? (which also can > > be overclocked, hehe). > > > > Prolly also need a new hard disk (at least 15Gb and with UDMA66 > > support). And I may go the whole hog and get a new DVD drive as well! > > (Bloody hell, this is gonna cost me!!!) > > > > Advice, opinions, comments, welcomed...... > > > > 8-) > > > > *Peter* - http://www.cix.co.uk/~peterpc/home.html > >

I don't see any mention of unlocking the multiplier here. The overclocking they are referring to is just increasing the bus speed Martyn_D Mark Stahl wrote:

Quoted text (56 lines)

> do you have a link for more info on mobos that can unlock the CPU > multiplier? this is the first i've heard of it.... thanks > > "A Thomas" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8kas1c$82i$[email hidden]... > > I'm planning to upgrade my system later this year to a Duron . A 650 mhz , > > with the right mobo , can be clocked as high as 950 according to > > www.tomshardware.com > > > > I've also got an Isa modem so I'll wait for either the Abit KT7 or the QDI > > Kinetiz boards to be released . Both of these boards can unlock the CPU > > multiplier . Tests so far confirm that the Duron is very fast for a > "value" > > chip. > > > > Andrew > > <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:8k9s1m$t3p$[email hidden]... > > > Ok, its got to that time again, first a few years ago it was F1GP2 that > > > forced me to upgrade (brand new Evesham Vale pc). Then it was GPL (Home > > > built brand new pc) that forced an upgrade. > > > > > > Now, with GP3 looming onto the horizon, I'm once more looking at the > > > best hardware upgrade options. > > > > > > So, has anyone got any opinions on the best upgrade path? (Obviously, > > > the pc's *main* use will be on-line and offline gaming, mostly driving > > > sims, TOCA2, GPL, GP2, GP3, Rally Masters, etc) > > > > > > NB: most previews, etc that I've seen concerning GP3, they appeared to > > > use 600 based cpu's, so I figure anything around 700/800 should run GP3 > > > pretty good? > > > > > > I'm thinking of either a Celeron (500a or 533a which apparently can > > > easily be overclocked to 750/800!) or an Athlon (Duron, which can also > > > be overclocked?) on a suitable M/B with AGPx4 & UDMA66 & softbios > > > settings & pc133 & FSB@133 support preferred. (Oh yeah, must have at > > > least 1 ISA slot too, cos my 56k Pace modem is ISA!) > > > > > > I'm hoping to use my old ATX case, PSU, keyboard, mouse & FDD. > > > > > > I was also thinking of getting some PC133 memory (min 128, possibly > > > 256Mb) and either a GeForce 2 GTS or Voodoo5 5000 card? (which also can > > > be overclocked, hehe). > > > > > > Prolly also need a new hard disk (at least 15Gb and with UDMA66 > > > support). And I may go the whole hog and get a new DVD drive as well! > > > (Bloody hell, this is gonna cost me!!!) > > > > > > Advice, opinions, comments, welcomed...... > > > > > > 8-) > > > > > > *Peter* - http://www.cix.co.uk/~peterpc/home.html > > > >

Buy what you need now, and for the future. If it over-clocks, that's a bonus. That's the _proper_ way to look at this. Overclocking isn't guaranteed. It's not a 'right'. You typically only hear about the success stories, with the failures buried away. The Athlon Platform is cheaper than the Intel, but the Intel is (RAMBUS/i820 fiasco aside) more reliable and requires less fiddling. I wouldn't buy a Celeron. No way, no how. Hot for heavy 3D Gaming. -Larry ----------------------------------------------------------- Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com. Up to 100 minutes free! http://www.keen.com

Larry wrote: > I wouldn't buy a Celeron. No way, no how. Hot for heavy 3D > Gaming. Really? Have I been missing something? I'll be moving up soon to either a PIII700 or 750, depending where the prices go. But I've used first a C300, and now a Celeron 466, and haven't had any complaints with it. Just curious how you come about the conclusion you do. -- Chuck Kandler GPL F1 Handicap of +210.00 as of 6/15 GPL F3 Handicap of +438.42 as of 6/21 K&S Racing http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 Registered Linux User #180746 http://counter.li.org

Hmmm i've also been running a heavily clocked celery for 2 years for 3d gaming and for the most part it competed at par with the p2's Celery 266 at 448 mhz v p2 450 SKurj Uncle Fester wrote:

Quoted text (19 lines)

> Larry wrote: > > > I wouldn't buy a Celeron. No way, no how. Hot for heavy 3D > > Gaming. > > Really? Have I been missing something? I'll be moving up soon to > either a PIII700 or 750, depending where the prices go. But I've used > first a C300, and now a Celeron 466, and haven't had any complaints with > it. Just curious how you come about the conclusion you do. > > -- > Chuck Kandler > GPL F1 Handicap of +210.00 as of 6/15 > GPL F3 Handicap of +438.42 as of 6/21 > K&S Racing > http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 > > Registered Linux User #180746 > http://counter.li.org

And.... bang for the buck a celery couldn't be beat back then Martyn_D SKurj Larry wrote:

Quoted text (23 lines)

> Buy what you need now, and for the future. If it over-clocks, > that's a bonus. > > That's the _proper_ way to look at this. > > Overclocking isn't guaranteed. It's not a 'right'. You > typically only hear about the success stories, with the failures > buried away. > > The Athlon Platform is cheaper than the Intel, but the Intel is > (RAMBUS/i820 fiasco aside) more reliable and requires less > fiddling. > > I wouldn't buy a Celeron. No way, no how. Hot for heavy 3D > Gaming. > > -Larry > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com. > Up to 100 minutes free! > http://www.keen.com

Because I've been there, and moved beyond it. Once you upgrade you'll understand. -Larry Uncle Fester <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>Larry wrote: > >> I wouldn't buy a Celeron. No way, no how. Hot for heavy 3D >> Gaming. > > >Really? Have I been missing something? I'll be moving up soon

to >either a PIII700 or 750, depending where the prices go. ButI've used >first a C300, and now a Celeron 466, and haven't had anycomplaints with

Quoted text (13 lines)

>it. Just curious how you come about the conclusion you do. > >-- >Chuck Kandler >GPL F1 Handicap of +210.00 as of 6/15 >GPL F3 Handicap of +438.42 as of 6/21 >K&S Racing >http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 > >Registered Linux User #180746 >http://counter.li.org > >

----------------------------------------------------------- Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com. Up to 100 minutes free! http://www.keen.com

I've recently upgraded to a Celeron 566(850) from my Celeron 300a(450) and I couldn't be happier. For less than $140US, I have a quick CPU running in my "old" ASUS P2B board. I bought a Slocket adapter, set the voltage to 1.8v, added some thermal compound(VERY IMPORTANT!!! It would not work without thermal compound!) and a Golden Orb fan. Now that's a nice bargain for a 400Mhz boost over my 300a/450. This way I didn't have to buy a new board and new RAM! Although, I did pick up a GeForce 2 GTS card to replace my aging Voodoo2. I hope this upgrade is better than the one I bought before GP2 came out! At the time, I bought a Pentium Pro 200(oc233) and a Matrox Millenium in hope of getting a great frame rate. I was a little disappointed. Actually, only with my 850 have I now been able to run Monaco with all details (sky was always the killer) and get 70-80% occupancy on the first turn. I have a funny feeling GP3 will run better in software mode than GP2. : ) Bring on GP3!! Michael M

In article <[email hidden]>, holysmokes!@spammy.net (teehole) wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 21:19:40 GMT, "Jeneral" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > To Michael M., (or other P2B(f) users), > > Btw, what are your bus (CPU and Core) frequency settings, to achieve > 850Mhz with your Cel-566? (been jumbling confused numbers, and thought > I'd just ask instead).

AFAIK, the multiplier for a Celeron 500a is clock (multiplier) locked at 7.5. It uses a bus speed of 66, hence 66 x 7.5 = 500Mhz. To overclock (which is actually the wrong term, as you need to overbus!) you increase the busspeed. Most people seem to get good results using 100Mhz busspeed, hence 100 x 7.5 = 750Mhz I think the 533a uses a multiplier (locked) at 8, hence 66 x 8 = 533. So upping the busspeed gives 8 x 100 = 800Mhz! 566 uses a multiplier of 8.5, etc, etc..... 8-) *Peter* - http://www.cix.co.uk/~peterpc/home.html

LOL... how do you *not* see any mention of unlocking the multiplier here?? if you read the message i'm replying to, it says, "I'll wait for either the Abit KT7 or the QDI Kinetiz boards to be released . Both of these boards can unlock the CPU multiplier" if i'm not mistaken, "...can unlock the CPU multiplier" means "can unlock the CPU multiplier". so.... does anyone have any info on these boards or not? are these AMD-only boards or has someone figured out a way around the intel multiplier-lock, too? "SKurj" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I don't see any mention of unlocking the multiplier here. Theoverclocking they

Quoted text (12 lines)

> are referring to is just increasing the bus speed > > Martyn_D > > Mark Stahl wrote: > > > do you have a link for more info on mobos that can unlock the CPU > > multiplier? this is the first i've heard of it.... thanks > > > > "A Thomas" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:8kas1c$82i$[email hidden]... > > > I'm planning to upgrade my system later this year to a Duron . A 650

mhz , > > > with the right mobo , can be clocked as high as 950 according to > > > www.tomshardware.com > > > > > > I've also got an Isa modem so I'll wait for either the Abit KT7 or theQDI > > > Kinetiz boards to be released . Both of these boards can unlock theCPU > > > multiplier . Tests so far confirm that the Duron is very fast for a > > "value" > > > chip. > > >

On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 21:19:40 GMT, "Jeneral" <[email hidden]> wrote: To Michael M., (or other P2B(f) users), Btw, what are your bus (CPU and Core) frequency settings, to achieve 850Mhz with your Cel-566? (been jumbling confused numbers, and thought I'd just ask instead). Does your P2B go above 8x CPU bus multiplier? I don't think mine does (an Asus P2B-rev.f). My P2B-f manual shows settings for 8x (maximum) CPU multiplier frequency, although almost any conceivable Core-setting is available, up to 150Mhz. Just confusing as to you did this, since Celerons are still fixed at 66MHz CPU bus, no? I keep looking at this multiplier, and don't understand how you got it to work, if your P2B is limited to a CPU-mulitplier of 8. This sounds like a fun and inexpensive project (all that ram saved, no great overhaul!). Otoh, (today) Celeron-700's are about $207.00/shipped right now, kinda expensive, as the Pentium-700 is about $230.00/shipped. Cel-600's are only $120.00/shipped. Hmm, while I'm bugging you..(<g>), what is the fastest "stock" Celeron or Pentium-III, that an Asus P2B-f can handle properly? It might be easier to just get a non-overclocked chip, but I still wonder if this board can handle the faster Celerons or P-3's. Also, my P2B slot-1 would require an adaptor. Are PPGA and a FCPGA adaptor 2 separate things? Is there such a thing as a Slot-1 to FCPGA adaptor? Dang slot-1, sure got tossed quickly. Sure hope I don't have to dump the MB to get some more speed. Like you, I'm starting get a little worried about GP3 too..<g>. I have a Voodoo-3/3000 and 196mb ram, and it's gonna have to last a while. My Celeron-433 (running at 75Mhz Core, no extra fans/settings) won't handle too many more future games/sims. Thanks for any info. Matt

Quoted text (21 lines)

>I've recently upgraded to a Celeron 566(850) from my Celeron 300a(450) and I >couldn't be happier. For less than $140US, I have a quick CPU running in my >"old" ASUS P2B board. I bought a Slocket adapter, set the voltage to 1.8v, >added some thermal compound(VERY IMPORTANT!!! It would not work without >thermal compound!) and a Golden Orb fan. Now that's a nice bargain for a >400Mhz boost over my 300a/450. This way I didn't have to buy a new board and >new RAM! Although, I did pick up a GeForce 2 GTS card to replace my aging >Voodoo2. >I hope this upgrade is better than the one I bought before GP2 came out! At >the time, I bought a Pentium Pro 200(oc233) and a Matrox Millenium in hope >of getting a great frame rate. I was a little disappointed. Actually, only >with my 850 have I now been able to run Monaco with all details (sky was >always the killer) and get 70-80% occupancy on the first turn. I have a >funny feeling GP3 will run better in software mode than GP2. : ) > >Bring on GP3!! > >Michael M > > >

Cmon, man. I never said that :) The AMD Thunderbird 800 is $259. -Larry ----------------------------------------------------------- Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com. Up to 100 minutes free! http://www.keen.com

woops me bad.. Mark Stahl wrote:

Quoted text (41 lines)

> LOL... how do you *not* see any mention of unlocking the multiplier here?? > > if you read the message i'm replying to, it says, "I'll wait for either the > Abit KT7 or the QDI Kinetiz boards to be released . Both of these boards can > unlock the CPU multiplier" > > if i'm not mistaken, "...can unlock the CPU multiplier" means "can unlock > the CPU multiplier". > > so.... does anyone have any info on these boards or not? > are these AMD-only boards or has someone figured out a way around the intel > multiplier-lock, too? > > "SKurj" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > I don't see any mention of unlocking the multiplier here. The > overclocking they > > are referring to is just increasing the bus speed > > > > Martyn_D > > > > Mark Stahl wrote: > > > > > do you have a link for more info on mobos that can unlock the CPU > > > multiplier? this is the first i've heard of it.... thanks > > > > > > "A Thomas" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:8kas1c$82i$[email hidden]... > > > > I'm planning to upgrade my system later this year to a Duron . A 650 > mhz , > > > > with the right mobo , can be clocked as high as 950 according to > > > > www.tomshardware.com > > > > > > > > I've also got an Isa modem so I'll wait for either the Abit KT7 or the > QDI > > > > Kinetiz boards to be released . Both of these boards can unlock the > CPU > > > > multiplier . Tests so far confirm that the Duron is very fast for a > > > "value" > > > > chip. > > > >

Hello Matt, I'll try to answer all your questions. First of all, all recent Intel CPU's are multiplier locked. In other words, the CPU ignores the multiplier settings on your motherboard. The only thing it needs from your motherboard is the bus frequency (If you're curious, change the multiplier on your board and you'll see that your CPU will ignore it and boot at its normal speed). By default, a Celeron 566 uses an 8.5 multiplier at 66Mhz. If you set the bus to 100 the CPU will show up as 850. Your P2B-F is newer than my board. I have an ASUS P2B rev. 1.02. All you might have to do, is get the latest BIOS from ASUS's website. You are correct that in order to make the CPU work in a Slot 1 configuration, you will need an FC-PGA to Slot 1 adapter. I purchased an Abit Slocket III with my processor. It's about $20 or so. I set it to 1.8v (depending on the revision of your motherboard, it might not boot up if you set it at less than 1.8v) on the adapter, applied some thermal compound ($1) and a nice Thermaltake Golden Orb Fan/Heatsink ($18) . Any decent fan will do provided you use some type thermal compound/grease. I elected to go with a better fan to dissipate the heat more efficiently. Believe me, the CPU's ambient temperature is about 4-5 deg Celsius lower with the better fan. Don't touch the Celeron 700's!!! They are junk! The 66Mhz bus is at its saturation point with a 10.5x multiplier. All reviews I've seen on that CPU recommend to stay away. You're better off getting a Celeron 533a at the very least. You can probably pick one up for about $100 and it'll easily overclock to 800+. I even did some benchmarks and to my surprise, found that Quake III ran better on my Celeron 300a/oc450 than at the 566/66 default. Obviously, the 100Mhz system Bus makes quite a difference. However, at 850, the Celeron 300/450, went cryin' home to mama =) One question for you, do you have PC100 or better RAM on your PC? If you don't, then you might be up you-know-what-creek... I'm assuming you do. With a Slocket adapter, your board should support any CPU up to a P3-850. The only catch will be you might have to over-volt it a wee bit depending on the revision of motherboard you have. The reason for that is that older motherboards, had a different voltage regulator that couldn't supply less than 1.8v to the CPU. The higher speed CPU's from Intel run at 1.7v so what's an extra .1v? Hope that helps! If you have any questions, feel free to e-mail me at the address below. Michael M [email hidden] P.S. If all that sounds very daunting, you can find many stores online that will ship you a pre-tested Celeron with a Fan and Slocket adapter for dirt cheap. "teehole" <holysmokes!@spammy.net> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (45 lines)

> On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 21:19:40 GMT, "Jeneral" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > To Michael M., (or other P2B(f) users), > > Btw, what are your bus (CPU and Core) frequency settings, to achieve > 850Mhz with your Cel-566? (been jumbling confused numbers, and thought > I'd just ask instead). > > Does your P2B go above 8x CPU bus multiplier? I don't think mine > does (an Asus P2B-rev.f). > > My P2B-f manual shows settings for 8x (maximum) CPU multiplier > frequency, although almost any conceivable Core-setting is available, > up to 150Mhz. > > Just confusing as to you did this, since Celerons are still fixed at > 66MHz CPU bus, no? I keep looking at this multiplier, and don't > understand how you got it to work, if your P2B is limited to a > CPU-mulitplier of 8. > > This sounds like a fun and inexpensive project (all that ram saved, > no great overhaul!). > > Otoh, (today) Celeron-700's are about $207.00/shipped right now, > kinda expensive, as the Pentium-700 is about $230.00/shipped. > Cel-600's are only $120.00/shipped. > > Hmm, while I'm bugging you..(<g>), what is the fastest "stock" > Celeron or Pentium-III, that an Asus P2B-f can handle properly? It > might be easier to just get a non-overclocked chip, but I still wonder > if this board can handle the faster Celerons or P-3's. > > Also, my P2B slot-1 would require an adaptor. Are PPGA and a FCPGA > adaptor 2 separate things? Is there such a thing as a Slot-1 to FCPGA > adaptor? Dang slot-1, sure got tossed quickly. Sure hope I don't have > to dump the MB to get some more speed. > > Like you, I'm starting get a little worried about GP3 too..<g>. I > have a Voodoo-3/3000 and 196mb ram, and it's gonna have to last a > while. My Celeron-433 (running at 75Mhz Core, no extra fans/settings) > won't handle too many more future games/sims. > > Thanks for any info. > > Matt

Athlons do not require any fiddling and are no less reliable than P3s. Build enough of them and you know this, otherwise you are simply regurgitating what you've read. The i820 was not an "aside", recalling 900,000 motherboards speaks volumes in terms of reliablility. No slight to Intel, they make great CPUs and chipsets but got suckered by RAMBUS. You don't hear about overclocking failures not because they are "buried away", but because there are hardly any. In 15 years in this business I have known one person to actually damage a CPU, and that was on a lark, just to see how fast it might go. Overclocking is part art, part science, and when done properly it works fabulously and saves money. I ran a Celeron 300A at 450MHz 24/7 for two years and it's still running beside this machine. With SLI'd Voodoo2 cards it fared extremely well in some very "heavy" 3D gaming. I currently run an Athlon 700 with a GeForce, all in a vanilla case with a 250W supply in spite of all the talk about this being a "power hungry" combination. My point, however rudely made, is, base your comments on experience, not on second-hand knowledge. I build and sell systems for a living. Nothing frustrates me more than a customer waving the latest popular rumour in my face and expecting me to belieive it surpasses practical experience. Doug Larry wrote:

Quoted text (24 lines)

> > Buy what you need now, and for the future. If it over-clocks, > that's a bonus. > > That's the _proper_ way to look at this. > > Overclocking isn't guaranteed. It's not a 'right'. You > typically only hear about the success stories, with the failures > buried away. > > The Athlon Platform is cheaper than the Intel, but the Intel is > (RAMBUS/i820 fiasco aside) more reliable and requires less > fiddling. > > I wouldn't buy a Celeron. No way, no how. Hot for heavy 3D > Gaming. > > -Larry > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com. > Up to 100 minutes free! > http://www.keen.com

Mark Stahl wrote: > so.... does anyone have any info on these boards or not? We'll have to see what ends up happening. I just read on Slashdot that the Asus A7V has just been announced that it will not be shipping with the multiplier unlocking switches as planned after all. Have to see if any others do. AFAIK, it's only about AMD right now. Haven't heard about similar developments in the Intel sphere. -- Chuck Kandler A man is no less a Slave just because he is allowed to choose a new Master every four years.

On Tue, 11 Jul 2000 06:30:25 GMT, "Jeneral" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Hello Matt, >I'll try to answer all your questions. -snip- >Hope that helps! If you have any questions, feel free to e-mail me at the >address below. I will email you, thanks! Matt p.s. Peter thanks for a better term for over-clocking celerons (over-bussing).

<[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8kfknq$j5p$[email hidden]... > In article <[email hidden]>, > > To overclock (which is actually the wrong term, as you need to overbus!) > you increase the busspeed. Most people seem to get good results using > 100Mhz busspeed, hence 100 x 7.5 = 750Mhz I think you're confused about what overclocking actually is. Overclocking in the CPU world is the process of running a chip at higher than it's rated speed. It doesn't matter how you achieve this - multiplier or bus speed. I have a Pentium Pro running at 233Mhz and I have a Celeron running at 850Mhz. Both are overclocked, one via the multiplier and one via the bus speed. Michael M

In article <qapb5.39807$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Jeneral) wrote:

Quoted text (20 lines)

> <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8kfknq$j5p$[email hidden]... > > In article <[email hidden]>, > > > > To overclock (which is actually the wrong term, as you need to > > overbus!) > > you increase the busspeed. Most people seem to get good results > > using > > 100Mhz busspeed, hence 100 x 7.5 = 750Mhz > > I think you're confused about what overclocking actually is. > Overclocking in > the CPU world is the process of running a chip at higher than it's > rated > speed. It doesn't matter how you achieve this - multiplier or bus > speed. I > have a Pentium Pro running at 233Mhz and I have a Celeron running at > 850Mhz. > Both are overclocked, one via the multiplier and one via the bus > speed.

Michael, thanks for the reply. I have overclocked lots of my own, and others hardware over the last few years, and I like to think I know the *basics* about how pc's work. I agree that the term overclocking is *generally* used to describe the practise of increasing the cpu speed. However, to be pedantic (sorry!) If the increased speed comes via increasing the busspeed, then you *are* effectively *overbussing*. Just my opinion.... 8-) *Peter* - http://www.cix.co.uk/~peterpc/home.html

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Jo Helsen) wrote:

Quoted text (32 lines)

> On Thu, 13 Jul 2000 19:57:10 GMT, "Jeneral" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > ><[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:8kfknq$j5p$[email hidden]... > >> In article <[email hidden]>, > >> > >> To overclock (which is actually the wrong term, as you need to > > overbus!) > >> you increase the busspeed. Most people seem to get good results > > using > >> 100Mhz busspeed, hence 100 x 7.5 = 750Mhz > > > >I think you're confused about what overclocking actually is. > Overclocking in > >the CPU world is the process of running a chip at higher than it's > rated > >speed. It doesn't matter how you achieve this - multiplier or bus > speed. I > >have a Pentium Pro running at 233Mhz and I have a Celeron running at > 850Mhz. > >Both are overclocked, one via the multiplier and one via the bus > speed. > > Sounds sensible. But isn't it so that when you crank up the busspeed, > *nothing at all* happens within the CPU. It just passively accepts a > higher "base-frequency". When you change multiplier factor on the > motherboard, you change the configuration of the CPU. It switches to > another "state". > > If that is correct(?), then it isn't total nonsense to use > "overbussing" to make the distinction.

Sorry, but the cpu speed is determined by *two* other factors. 1) the busspeed 2) the multiplier These two factors multiplied give the cpu speed. So, if you change *either* the busspeed or the multiplier, the cpu speed will change. EG: if you have a Celeron 300 running at 300 it has a busspeed of 66 and a multiplier of 4.5 (66 x 4.5 = 300) NB: The result of this sum is actually 297, but the busspeed is never actually running at 66 exactly, it is usually slightly higher, say 66.6? If you increase the multiplier to say to 5, then the cpu speed increases to 333 (5 x 66 = 333) NB: I know you *can't* change the multiplier on a Celeron cos the multiplier is locked, but on many cpu's you can, this is only an example! If you increase the busspeed only, say to 100 then the cpu speed increases to 450 (100 x 4.5 = 450) Now do you see how it works? 8-) *Peter* - http://www.cix.co.uk/~peterpc/home.html

[email hidden] wrote:

Quoted text (63 lines)

>In article <[email hidden]>, >[email hidden] (Jo Helsen) wrote: > >> On Thu, 13 Jul 2000 19:57:10 GMT, "Jeneral" <[email hidden]> >> wrote: >> >> ><[email hidden]> wrote in message >> >news:8kfknq$j5p$[email hidden]... >> >> In article <[email hidden]>, >> >> >> >> To overclock (which is actually the wrong term, as you need to >> > overbus!) >> >> you increase the busspeed. Most people seem to get good results >> > using >> >> 100Mhz busspeed, hence 100 x 7.5 = 750Mhz >> > >> >I think you're confused about what overclocking actually is. >> Overclocking in >> >the CPU world is the process of running a chip at higher than it's >> rated >> >speed. It doesn't matter how you achieve this - multiplier or bus >> speed. I >> >have a Pentium Pro running at 233Mhz and I have a Celeron running at >> 850Mhz. >> >Both are overclocked, one via the multiplier and one via the bus >> speed. >> >> Sounds sensible. But isn't it so that when you crank up the busspeed, >> *nothing at all* happens within the CPU. It just passively accepts a >> higher "base-frequency". When you change multiplier factor on the >> motherboard, you change the configuration of the CPU. It switches to >> another "state". >> >> If that is correct(?), then it isn't total nonsense to use >> "overbussing" to make the distinction. > >Sorry, but the cpu speed is determined by *two* other factors. > >1) the busspeed >2) the multiplier > >These two factors multiplied give the cpu speed. > >So, if you change *either* the busspeed or the multiplier, the cpu speed >will change. > >EG: if you have a Celeron 300 running at 300 it has a busspeed of 66 and >a multiplier of 4.5 (66 x 4.5 = 300) > >NB: The result of this sum is actually 297, but the busspeed is never >actually running at 66 exactly, it is usually slightly higher, say 66.6? > >If you increase the multiplier to say to 5, then the cpu speed increases >to 333 (5 x 66 = 333) > >NB: I know you *can't* change the multiplier on a Celeron cos the >multiplier is locked, but on many cpu's you can, this is only an >example! > >If you increase the busspeed only, say to 100 then the cpu speed >increases to 450 (100 x 4.5 = 450) > >Now do you see how it works?

Yes, I understaaaaand all that :-) It was not my point. What I wanted to say is that, when you "overbus", you aren't actually changing anything IN the processor. It runs at a higher frequency without "being aware of it". But if you change the multiplier, the processor *is* aware of it. Its configuration is changed because it gets signal(s) on certain pins. At least I *think* this is a sensible explanation? JoH ------- The best way to accelerate a Mac is 9.81 m/s2 -------- --------------------------------------------------------------

On Thu, 13 Jul 2000 19:57:10 GMT, "Jeneral" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

><[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:8kfknq$j5p$[email hidden]... >> In article <[email hidden]>, >> >> To overclock (which is actually the wrong term, as you need to overbus!) >> you increase the busspeed. Most people seem to get good results using >> 100Mhz busspeed, hence 100 x 7.5 = 750Mhz > >I think you're confused about what overclocking actually is. Overclocking in >the CPU world is the process of running a chip at higher than it's rated >speed. It doesn't matter how you achieve this - multiplier or bus speed. I >have a Pentium Pro running at 233Mhz and I have a Celeron running at 850Mhz. >Both are overclocked, one via the multiplier and one via the bus speed.

Sounds sensible. But isn't it so that when you crank up the busspeed, *nothing at all* happens within the CPU. It just passively accepts a higher "base-frequency". When you change multiplier factor on the motherboard, you change the configuration of the CPU. It switches to another "state". If that is correct(?), then it isn't total nonsense to use "overbussing" to make the distinction. JoH

Quoted text (12 lines)

> Michael, thanks for the reply. I have overclocked lots of my > own, and others hardware over the last few years, and I like to think I > know the *basics* about how pc's work. > > I agree that the term overclocking is *generally* used to describe the > practise of increasing the cpu speed. However, to be pedantic (sorry!) > If the increased speed comes via increasing the busspeed, then you *are* > effectively *overbussing*. > > Just my opinion.... > > 8-)

Sorry to beat a dead horse Peter, but by your definition, changing the multiplier to overclock a processor would be called *overmultiplying*?? My point, as stated before, is if a CPU is running at higher than its badged frequency, it IS overclocked. After all, the term "clock" in overclocking is referring to the Millions of Cycles Per Second (Mhz) not the multiplier. It's irrelevant how this increased frequency was achieved. Your term (*overbussing*) can be used to describe a FORM of overclocking but NOT replace the term altogether! Michael M

Jeneral wrote: > > Sorry to beat a dead horse Peter, > but by your definition, changing the multiplier to overclock a processor > would be called *overmultiplying*?? Wrongo! The full term is clock-multiplier. When you upped the clock multiplier in the old days, you were "overclocking". Now that they are multiplier-locked, all you can do is up the bus. Not as easy or reliable a way as it used to be, but that's the only way now. Technically, Peter is correct. Although, in the end, does it really matter since the end result is the same? :-) -- Chuck Kandler A man is no less a Slave just because he is allowed to choose a new Master every four years.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Jo Helsen) wrote: > What I wanted to say is that, when you "overbus", you aren't actually > changing > anything IN the processor. Agreed, but, you *are* changing the cpu speed. 8-) *Peter* - http://www.cix.co.uk/~peterpc/home.html

In article <sYRb5.43722$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Jeneral) wrote: > Sorry to beat a dead horse Peter, > but by your definition, changing the multiplier to overclock a > processor > would be called *overmultiplying*?? Hmmm, But the multiplier *directly* affects the cpu speed (and nothing else), whereas the busspeed *indirectly* affects the cpu speed, IYSWIM? But they *both* can be called overclocking, as this is a *generic* term used to describe an increase in the cpu clock speed. Whereas, increasing the busspeed (overbussing) also affects other parts of the system, hard disk speed, graphics card speed, main memory speed, etc. In conclusion, we both know what we mean, we just have different definitions for it! I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.... 8-) *Peter* - http://www.cix.co.uk/~peterpc/home.html

[email hidden] wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > In article <[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] (Jo Helsen) wrote: > > > What I wanted to say is that, when you "overbus", you aren't actually > > changing > > anything IN the processor. > > Agreed, but, you *are* changing the cpu speed. > > 8-) > > *Peter* - http://www.cix.co.uk/~peterpc/home.html

Which is, when it really comes down to it, all AMD or Intel does with their processors (to a point) to make them go faster. Take two processors of a given family (say Mendocino core Celerons or non-MMX Pentiums or AMD K6-2s with 3dNow etc etc) and the faster one is simply going to be the one that had the best tolerances. They change little to nothing on the chip iteself to make it go faster. Kirk Lane [email hidden]